Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

I'll believe that when they start dying on it. The current GOP are masters of rear-guard action. Yesterday it was all sour grapes and partisan witch hunt, tomorrow it'll be whatever other alternate reality they'd prefer to be living in.

And they deleted my comment, which was a courteously-worded reply to someone who said something like "is this all they got on Flynn?", and I replied that this was just the start, and Flynn had clearly struck a deal that would lead to him incriminating Trump.

wow, Russia Today and Breitbart links, next we'll have people posting Trump Tweets as proof that there is nothing to this.

__________________It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtahI am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

No that wasn’t it at all. Because Flynn was charged with lying, that makes him a terrible witness. That is what Dershowitz’s point was.

No, that was just a lame attempt to buttress his main point:

Quote:

I’m sure the prosecutor was trying to indict him for some scheme or conspiracy that involved other people in the White House, but there is nothing there, and he had to, finally come down and indict him for lying, which makes him a useless witness. So, this is not a show of strength by the prosecutor. It’s a show of weakness. It’s a show that they really have nothing on anybody above of Flynn and that Flynn made the terrible mistake about lying about something he could have told truth about.

Saw Dershowitz on CNN today as a pundit. He's going around giving his biased opinion claiming it is based on his legal expertise. It's not. He was called out by another pundit as being totally biased toward the request for the delayed resolution against Israel.

It's like Trump not caring if Russia interfered in the election, Trump won. Dershowitz was all for the Russian intervening, because he wanted the outcome about the resolution against Israel deferred.

"Attorney Alan Dershowitz says special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia 'endangers Democracy.'”

"The idea of trying to create crimes just because we disagree with [Trump] politically, and target him, really endangers democracy. [It] reminds me of what the head of the KGB said to Stalin: 'Show me the man, and I will find you the crime,'" Dershowitz told John Catsimatidis on New York's AM 970 in an interview that aired on Sunday.

You might want to familiarize yourself with what Papa and Flynn lied about? Then simply ask yourself, does this prove collusion?

It seems they were lying to cover up or minimize contacts they had had with Russians.

This at a time when their boss was asserting that “the Russia thing” was “a ruse”, and that no one on his team had made such contacts.

Theory 1: They lied on their own out of a sense of loyalty.

Theory 2: The had instructions or pressure to lie in order to validate Trump’s assertions.

I assume the investigators are in search of evidence to support or refute either of these theories.

If the evidence confirms Theory 2, the question will be a paraphrase of Watergate’s: “What did the President order, and when did he order it?”

__________________“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that...I will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” - President Donald J. Trump, January 20, 2017.
"And it's, frankly, disgusting the way the press is able to write whatever they want to write. And people should look into it." - President Donald J. Trump, October 11, 2017.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.